Ursinus Intro Ethics Blog - Section A

I really like the drowning child comparison, and I thought he really made some good insights in describing why helping starvation in Bengali does not apply to this analogy. After pinning peoples’ lack of guilt on the lack of condemnation and pointing the finger at others not helping, he reveals the biggest obstacle: we’re not up close and personal to the problem, like we would be if we were put in the position of saving a drowning child. I would think one would have to save the drowning child because of the clear and present urgency of the situation, but because people don’t see the starvation problem up close, they may tend to ignore or put pleas for help in the back of their minds. I know I’ve been guilty of this before (especially when it comes to giving blood).

I think the lack of derision for not contributing mixed with the fact that Bengali’s starvation does not directly affect anyone here renders most Americans apathetic towards the issue. Donations are appreciated but not expected, and like Singer says, this is wrong. Americans, in general, could benefit from giving more. Taking a little money out of the economy and giving it to a place of need wouldn’t hurt that much. People may definitely loose jobs if we take a significant amount of money out of the economy, but its not like even close to everybody has jobs now anyway. Thus, why not sacrifice a little and help a much bigger issue?

Another underlined message in his article was the fact that as a whole, society isn’t getting it done. So to improve, we must act first as individuals. For once, don’t look to the next person to go first, but instead, take the initiative and do something productive. (We might get more pleasure out of knowing we made a difference than any electronic possession can every bring us.)

# posted by Kelly Sorensen @ 8:31 AM